Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

On the Energy Conservation Front…

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

This news has come in from Dominion Virginia Power…

  • Dominion has started enrolling customers for the first of its nine energy-conservation pilot programs: the PowerCost Monitor. Sensors installed on home meters will send wireless signals to in-home displays estimating how much is being spent on electricity at any given time. The 1,000 residential customers in the pilot project will be able to track energy costs by either kilowatts or dollars for different appliances. As the appliances are turned on and off, customers will be able to view energy savings in the device display. (See press release.)

  • Dominion has sold the 1 millionth energy-efficient compact fluorescent lightbulb under its CFL promotion initiative. The power company estimates that consumer savings will amount to $270 million over the multi-year life of the bulbs, and CO2 emissions will be reduced by 1.5 million tons – the equivalent of removing 264,710 cars from the road for one year. (See press release.)

Let’s do some back-of-the-envelope math. There are roughly 3 million households in Virginia. Let’s say the average household has 20 light bulbs. The CFL initiative represents 1/60th the potential savings available through switching out light bulbs. This one, simple change could be the equivalent of getting 16 million cars off the road (more cars than there are in the Commonwealth) — while simultaneously saving Virginia families money!

Bacon’s bottom line: Combine the CFL initiative with the PowerCost Monitor and the ability to reduce consumption by managing appliances — and let’s not forget Dominion’s other power-saving initiatives coming up — and we should have no trouble meeting the Virginia Energy Plan goal of reducing electricity consumption 10 percent from what it otherwise would be by 2022. We should set far more ambitious goals for ourselves.

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

  1. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “the PowerCost Monitor. Sensors installed on home meters will send wireless signals to in-home displays estimating how much is being spent on electricity at any given time.”

    Sure. Or you could go look at the label on the device and then post a note next to each switch: “$0.25 per minute”, or similar.

    Think of all the money and resources we could save on Power cost monitors.

    RH

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    North Carolina residents, for almost a year now, have cut their water consumption by a third in response to a record drought.

    Now, the residents of Charlotte-Mecklenburg County are getting a hefty reward for their sacrifice: they’ll be paying more for their water.

    Perhaps ticked-off residents shouldn’t be surprised: less spending on water has left Charlotte with a projected $29 million shortfall over this year and next. Utilities officials say they must raise rates to make up for the losses.

    Has Joe Citizen shot himself in the foot?

    From Frekonomics.

    RH

  3. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    http://seekingalpha.com/article/68788-is-solar-power-inherently-deflationary

  4. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Our brand new delegate (Margi Vanderhye) has sponsored legislation that seems reasonable and useful in this matter. Yet she is getting opposition from some parts of the GA. Why? Jim – isn’t it reasonable to require the state government department with the highest paid executives (i.e. Dominion – Virginia) to disclose how citizen / tax payers can buy more environmentally friendly electricity?

    I have issues with some of things Del. Vanderhye has done since being elected. However, this seems like a really good idea.

    And anybody who says that this represents government meddling in free enterprise should also consider the re-regulations (and rate of return guarantee) that government has provided Dominion – Virginia.

    http://www.richmondsunlight.com/bill/2008/hb1228/

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “If you look carefully at the expensive technology (and investment capital) needed to extract fossil fuels from 5 miles under the earth or ocean, and compare that with the technology needed to extract electricity from the sun, you can see that the main debate is levels of cost-efficiency ($) for creating power. “

    Yup. When solar is cheaper, it will be cheaper. it is already true (EMR will love this) when you consider location as part of the cost.

    RH

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “…solar energy – like the Internet before it – is a grid-based (networked) application and inherently deflationary [progressively producing more output at less cost ($)].”

    Oh goody: more output, less money, more consumption. Gee I love conservation.

    RH

  7. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    Jim Bacon:

    You know we agree in principle with you but,

    We just counted our light bulbs. 130 in this Unit. The Unit is above average size but no McMansion as you know.

    Of those way over half do not have a based for which there are florecent bulbs avaliable.

    We have swaped out all the ones where there would be savings from florecents and fifteen years ago we switched to sun light spectrum lights in the reading areas that give us 250 watts of light for 67 watts of power. But the fixtures plus bulbs are very expensive and do not have a positive ROI.

    What would be the cost and embedded energy in changing all those fixtures?

    There are some places where florecents are not very useful.

    My point?

    Fundamental Change in settlement patterns

    Stop lighting the sky and unoccupied space

    Changing to on-site generation for non-urban users

    Will be be required to make a real dent in TOTAL energy consumption.

    Even switching a little used closet light to an expensive florecent and tossing out (Does anyone know a good use for used but still not burned out bulbs? We have a lot.) existing bulbs may not be TOTAL energy effecient.

    EMR

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I thought 20 ws kind of low, but when I counted mine I came up with 32 for a 3300 sq ft (older) home. Maybe this is a hangover of the days when there was insufficient electricity available this far outside of town. You know, where people go to bed at night.

    I changed out to fluorescents years ago, but I found I had to put inccandescents back in a few places. Some of them were turned on and off too often and this shortened their lifetime.

    Because the house is old it hasn’t many of those cutesy decorator fixtures with nonstandard bases, but I changed two (chandeliers) out, over time.

    Rooms we pass through but don’t use much (hallways and stairwell) have motion detectors, and incandescent lights, in order to save money AND energy.

    I’m glad to see EMR recognizes the concept of embedded energy. It probably applies to onsite generation for nonurban users, so rather than making a blanket statement about who should do what, we should have easy to use tools to help each decide for each situation, and when to change tactics. None of them are always true.

    And don’t for get to follow EPA guidleines when disposing of fluorescents. Double bag them in plastic and drive them to a recognized recycling center. You can usually find one at WalMart.

    If it is broken, sweep, don’t vacuum. Try to make sure you get up all 5 micrograms of mercury. You can blot with a damp cloth to help with the cleanup, and dispose of the cloth along with the bulb. If you have it around the house, hot nitric acid makes a good solvent for mercury, but it’s kind of hard on the rugs.

    RH

  9. E M Risse Avatar
    E M Risse

    One other thing re the curly fluorescents…

    We saw a Daily Mail (UK) story that quoted the “Migrain Action Assn” to the effect that fluorescents caused migrain headaches in some people due to high frequency flicker.

    When the sunlight spectrum lights start to go they flicker too.

    We have noted that the curly fluorescents flicker when new in some lamps and will not turn off and on as incandescents do with some timers and remote switches we have in the Unit.

    But then our beeswax candles flicker too…

    EMR

    curlie rom

  10. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Yep. I think Migraines are somewhat related to epilepsy. One test for epilespy is to strobe your eyes with varying frequencies while monitoring brainwaves and electrocardiogram, to search for sensitivities. Sometimes a certain frequency will trigger a spasm.

    I sometimes get something like the migraine effect when driving along a treeline with the sun low behind – providing a kind of strobe effect.

    The fluorescent effect is wosre when commbined with somethin that flickers ata another frequency – like the TV or monitor.

    RH

  11. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    A friend of mine works for PEPCO. He told me that the biggest problem with electric power is about four weeks in July and August when the afternoon demand for power is off the charts. He told me that power generation costs would be substantially lower if the electric power industry did not need to meet this peak demand.

    I don’t think that this argues against conservation generally, but wouldn’t the low-hanging fruit be found in driving down afternoon demand in July and August? It’s good if I can reduce my power consumption in March, but seemingly, it’s much better for me to do so on July and August afternoons — unless Dominion is quite different from PEPCO.

    TMT

  12. Michael Ryan Avatar
    Michael Ryan

    Twenty light bulbs? Good lord! I have a total of 6 just in my two bathrooms (all CFL). There are 8 (2 CFL, 2 FL) just in the room I’m sitting in now.

    My quick mental count says this 50-yr old, 1400sf, house has 50+ bulbs in it (ceiling & bath fixtures, table & floor lamps, etc), not counting the garage and outdoor lighting.

  13. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Yep. In those days I think they counted on the light bulbs to provide some of the heat for the house. My older and larger house has many fewer lights.

    My previous count was low by a couple because I have a ceiling light that has twin bulbs and one multibulb chandelier.

    Gee, 50 in a 1400 sq ft house seems like a lot.

    RH

  14. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    “Sensors installed on home meters will send wireless signals to in-home displays estimating how much is being spent on electricity at any given time.”

    regardless of how many CFs folks have.. the big payoff is IF you KNOW how much your usage is…in real time.

    Only then.. will you start looking at things that cause “spikes” in your usage.

    It might be an old fridge… or a dryer.. or a furnace…

    At that point.. for some folks.. they’ll want to know if those “spikes” are something you can do something about with a newer/more efficient unit..

    etc, etc.. the idea being that the more you know .. the more you have some idea about whether your conservation efforts are “worth” it or not.

    the conversation that is going on in this thread is .. oh so fuzzy..

    Has anyone actually found out how much LESS energy that they are actually using for THEIR home?

    Further.. are there OTHER conservation strategies that might be as profitable or more so than using CFs throughout your home?

    This is the kind of info that I feel would help us all become more involved in HOW to conserve.

    The second part of real-time monitoring.. is when/if the power company starts actually charging customers what it actually costs to produce peak power.

    Right now, your electric company charges you MORE for non-peak power to offset their loss when delivering peak power to you.

    Would you reduce your peak power consumption if you had to pay 8 times the regular rate for it?

    Would you DEFER your use of electricity IF you knew?

    The way we do our homes these days is akin to buying a car that does NOT have an EPA rating… AND you’d simple not know what actions would get you better gas mileage or worse..

    We need .. for homes.. the ability to know how much we use and when we use it before we can begin to want to look into how to .. at the least .. not use more than is necessary… for “green” whether it be the environmental version or the wallet version.

  15. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Would you reduce your peak power consumption if you had to pay 8 times the regular rate for it?”

    If it is a big problem two months of the year, maybe.

    If it is 8 times as much every morning at 6 AM, probably not.

    “the big payoff is IF you KNOW how much your usage is…in real time.”

    Right. How is that going to work? Every time I turn on the light a mecanical voice says “6 cents a kilowatt.” Then what? 5000 other people turn on their lights and the damn thing says “the cost now is 8 cents a kilowatt”?

    Or every time I turn on the air compressor, I have to run up to the house and log on (yet another appliance) to find out what it costs? Now, if its a welder, sucking up tons of juice, then thats different.

    “Right now, your electric company charges you MORE for non-peak power to offset their loss when delivering peak power to you.”

    Sounds likea fair trade to me. What’s the problem? I pay more off peak, less on peak: it all averages out. AND, whoopee, I get electricity when I want it.

    Oh, that’s right: its that same guy who says he didn’t cause the holes in the boat, so he shouldn’t have to pump.

    And, I’ll remind you again the technology to actually do this on a large scale isstill being worked out. Radio signals have distance, capacity, and bandwith considerations. Sending the signal over the wire doesn’t work past the substation (as I understand it), and not everyone has telephones (beleive it or not) and an extra line might be required.

    I know how to conserve electricity: shut off stuff I’m not using. Read under dim lights. Cook on the barbecue, (oops sorry, greenhouse gas).

    Oh yeah, and re-arrange my schedule in order to allegedly lower someone else’s costs. We saw how well THAT worked for the North Carolina water customers. Sure enough, your electric company charges you MORE for power to offset their loss when you buy less.

    Energy saving Fluorescent bulbs cost less to run and last longer in some circumstances. My “Energy saving” hot water heater was a total bust and a collosal waste of money. I had to disable the energy saving feature in order to actually have – hot water.

    RH

  16. floodguy Avatar
    floodguy

    Why does Dominion need a pilot project for smart meters when state’s electric co-op’s have been providing free meters for its customers since 1979?

    Dominion has known about their so-called need for more capacity, prior to the spring of 2006. The governor’s energy plan passed last fall and still Dominion hasn’t started its smart meter pilot for outdoor a/c units and hotwater heaters.

    Dominion is lame and the politicans who run our state assembly are blind and stupid.

    As for the priorities, seems as though creating a cash cow utility is more important in Richmond than anything else. The demand reduction initiatives will follow, once the projects which will supply Dominion its conveyor belt of cash are approved and put in place.

    Get ready for summer rate hikes, more power lines, and more old dirty coal generation. Dominion will get the efficiency and conservation part down when they get to it. 10% by 2022 has got to be the weakest of any state’s efficiency goals.

    In the old days, Virginia used to spearhead change and lead our nation. Today its a different story. Way to go Richmond.

  17. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “Why does Dominion need a pilot project for smart meters when state’s electric co-op’s have been providing free meters for its customers since 1979?”

    Good question.

    What transmission technology do they use? How is the info provided to the customer? Is it ready for prime time universal coverage? If so, what will that cost compared to providing a few random meters?

    Once the projects which will supply Dominion its conveyor belt of cash are approved and put in place.

    Yup. No cash – no electricity. You saw what happened to the water customers in North Carolina. They conserved themselves right into higher prices. Let’s put rent control on the power companies and watch service decline like those apartments in DC.

    And part of pur 401K’s will decline with it.

    The point ought to be to make sure that Dominion does get a fair return on its investments. And make sure they don’t make needless investments. And make sure there is enough peak capacity that we will still have some when we really need it.

    Dominions not the one that needs the capacity. We do. We can do our conservation thing and cut 20%. We can shower with a friend.

    Then when we eventually grow 20% more people and invent goodies that consume 20% more power, well, we can enjoy perioodic blackouts like some cities have. Then we will have built in, real time rate information, and no smart meters needed.

    When the power goes off, your rate is zero.

    RH

    RH

  18. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    The more you connect the cost to the actual usage.. the more it allows each individual to make choices about how much they wish to consume verses how much it costs.

    You don’t cut your usage to benefit others; you cut your usage to benefit you.

    The system we have now – spreads the costs out so monolithically that the savings that one individual can recoup are minimal and not in proportion to actual savings.

    Translation – you don’t save any more money by cutting back peak power than you do off peak power -even though it costs 8 times as much to produce.

    Imagine what would happen if we did cell phones this way….

    the cell phone pricing structure is very much “peak hour” and it works quite well.

    We need to replicate it for electricity and roads..

  19. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The more you connect the cost to the actual usage.. the more it allows each individual to make choices about how much they wish to consume verses how much it costs.”

    Yeah, yeah, yeah. If a little is good, more is better, right?

    At some point, you force individuals to make trivial decisions. At that point you are forour costs on them, and it is wrong.

    I don;t make any claim to know where that point is. All I know is that as soon as you make the unsupported claim that “the more you….”

    You lost my support.

    I suspect you lost others as well.

    When you keep getting headed, it’s time to try a different tack.

    “…you don’t save any more money by cutting back peak power than you do off peak power -even though it costs 8 times as much to produce.”

    My point exactly. If you don’t save any money and it costs in convenience, then why do it?

    ????

    RH

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “You don’t cut your usage to benefit others; you cut your usage to benefit you.”

    Why does it benefit me to cut my usage just when I need it most?

    RH

  21. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “The system we have now – spreads the costs out so monolithically that the savings that one individual can recoup are minimal and not in proportion to actual savings.”

    Isn’t that the point? It is different spliting the check with two people at the table than with million at the table.

    If the savings are minimal, so are the losses. Why would I want to take the risk that I could “save a bundle” at the cost of convenience and security?

    If I worked a night job, or if I was retired, then maybe I could see an advantage for me. But the whole beginning point of this argument is to gain an advantae for all.

    I don’t see it.

    What I see is that North Carolina residents cut their water usage and were suitably rewarded. They pay a higher price, for less water. That means less fresh tomatoes and corn, to me.

    No deal.

    When you have a good argument, I’ll let you know.

    Devils Advocate

    (RH)

  22. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “…the cell phone pricing structure is very much “peak hour” and it works quite well.”

    For the phone company. I can;t say it does much for me, or anyone else.

    Last night I saw someone broken down on the road. In a very bad situation: right at the off ramp, in the rain.

    This moron had his (wife) behind the car with a (weak) flashlight trying to wave off the oncomeing traffic.

    If the price was high enough, I might not have made the call to the police for help.

    (I hope that #77 is free, but you see the point.)

    RH

  23. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    …”At some point, you force individuals to make trivial decisions. At that point you are forour costs on them, and it is wrong.”

    you’re not “forcing” individuals to do ANYTHING other than pay the actual costs for they personally use.

    It’s simply stepping back and letting supply and demand work the way it should.

    Our system right now for some things is actually set up to ENCOURAGE consumption by pricing it lower than it actually costs to provide it.

    The only folks who are entitled to pay less for something than it actually costs are those that are vulnerable and unable to fend for themselves.

    Everyone else should pay full boat freight.

  24. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “you’re not “forcing” individuals to do ANYTHING other than pay the actual costs for they personally use.”

    At a gross level I agree with you. Where I start to have aproblem is when the idie that everyone should pay every little cost that anyone can manage to attribute to them, even when the system for doing so costs more than the damage inflicted.

    It is the point at which you force others to make trivial decisions that you think will benefit you, even if you can’t prove it.

    I only claim that such a point exists, not to know what or where it is. You seem to refuse to admit it exists, and I think this is a recipe for mismanagement of our resources.

    RH

  25. Larry Gross Avatar
    Larry Gross

    I think the way to deal with that is to not knowingly allow such subsidies in the first place.

    Further.. do not allow subsidies on the pretext that they are compensation for other alleged reverse-subsidies.

    The problem that we have is .. rampant expectations that everyone get a “break” on something…

    and that just leads to more and more expectations that we are “entitled” to subsidies… because everyone else is getting them also.

  26. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “I think the way to deal with that is to not knowingly allow such subsidies in the first place.”

    I agree; and that is why I insist that we measure, measure, measure.

    We cannot simply allow people to claim that others are costing them unfairly through externalilties, unless the externalities are well documented.

    In the end,

    “rampant expectations that everyone get a “break” on something”

    boils down to equality.

    When we have that, we will still need to be able to make a living, and have a reasonable place to live.

    Economy, Environment, Equality.

    RH

Leave a Reply

Read More